A lost decade for U.S. economy, workers

[maseman]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34664092/ns/business-washington_post

For most of the past 70 years, the U.S. economy has grown at a steady clip, generating perpetually higher incomes and wealth for American households. But since 2000, the story is starkly different.

The past decade was the worst for the U.S. economy in modern times, a sharp reversal from a long period of prosperity that is leading economists and policymakers to fundamentally rethink the underpinnings of the nation's growth.

>>A great article. Spend a few minutes reading. Shrubby and his minions detroyed our country and Reupkes blame it Clinton and Obama.

[MadHound]

1. Umm, it's not just this decade,

This is just a steeper drop in what has been a long, thirty seven year decline in real world wages for workers. We've also seen an ongoing, decades long effort to fudge the unemployment numbers, starting with Reagan. Add in policies that are designed to reward the rich while balancing the budget on the backs of the middle, working and poor classes, setting up an ongoing transfer of wealth. None of this is new, it has been a bipartisan effort. The only thing different about this decade is that it is finally reaching out and biting people who are far enough up the food chain that when they get bitten, they get noticed.

[WT Fuheck]

2. +1

This is not a "cyclical correction" or any such. The very nature of our economy has been altered. The wealthy have won the class war.

[Nikki Stone1]

3. +1

.

[Sherman A1]

4. +1

You said it all...

[Yuugal]

5. +1

spot on

[maseman]

6. While I agree that Reagan's policies created this scenario

It really wasn't felt until the past several years. Bush Jr. only accelerated the decline of the middle class. When it was looking like the middle class would crash and burn...it did by bailing out the fat-cats at the banks and Wall Street.

[MadHound]

8. Really wasn't felt by who? You?

Sorry, not meaning to be rude here, but my family and I have been feeling the effects of this from the very beginning.

I started out my adult life homeless in part because of Carter's bad handling of the economic policy, and the recession that he passed on to Reagan. While I managed to finally find a job and some stability, I watched as others around me slid backwards. Outsourcing isn't something that came into being under Clinton, it has been an ongoing process that has devastated people out here in the Midwest. I watched as my small home town go from a manufacturing/agriculture base to being a tourist trap/service base because of the policies enacted during the seventies and eighties. They were fortunate, many small farm towns couldn't make that transition and have dried up and blown away.

When Clinton accelerated outsourcing with NAFTA and other "free" trade policies, it had a huge effect here in the Midwest. It swept away the remnants of the manufacturing sector, and created a permanent service class that are ill paid. These were good middle class families and jobs. Sure, this didn't get big coverage out on the coasts, after all, we're in "flyover country", but for millions of families life under Clinton took a sharp downturn.

Yes, Bush did put a huge hit on the middle class in this country, but to pile it all on his shoulders is simply partisan bullshit. While you may have been personally fine on the coasts or in the cities, out here in the Midwest, our suffering began long before Bush, Clinton, or even Reagan. It has only been continuing since.

This has been a long term, little publicized slide for millions of families over the past three-four decades. While it accelerated under some administrations and slowed under others, it has still continued on its downward trajectory. Frankly every administration from Nixon on have had a hand in destroying our society, our middle class, our country, and believe me, there is more than enough blame to go around for all of them.

[madokie]

12. You pretty much are spelling it out for the ones who chose to listen

I agree with what you're saying 100%

[madokie]

9. As I look back our decline really started with the nixon gang

I still think the nixionians needed a diversion so the green light was given for the oil cartels to start shafting us and shafting us good. We went from 30 cent gas here to 60 cent gas overnight. Told us on the evening news one day to be expecting that gas will be going up in the near future to wake the very next morning to lines to buy gas. I remember that well. That was when I learned all about hypermiling, something that I learned that has served me well though the years I might add. Our budgets were for 30 cent gas and all of a sudden it was taking twice that, it hurt. Wages to the cost of living went down hill and is still going down hill. The bastids anyway

[MadHound]

10. You're right,

1972 was the year that real world wages started declining. Up until then wages had risen consistently, year in, year out.

Before 1972, most middle class families could have a comfortable living on a single income, but as things started tightening up, women started flooding into the workplace. Part of this was due to women wanting careers (which I applaud), but also simply due to necessity.

Within twenty years it became the norm for both parents to work full time, and frankly I think that the family and children in this country have suffered. Not saying that I think that we should go back to the bad old days of the stay at home June Cleaver mom, but I am convinced that children are raised better, and do better in school when one of the parents, mother or father, are at home when the kids go to school and there when they get home from school.

[ThomWV]

7. I am hunted by a different explanation for the mess, but them I was an economist, not a journalist

Look, I was trained as an economist (never worked in the field and am retired now) not a journalist, and while the story presented in the article represents what is the common thinking on our economic failure I don't think it captures the fundamental problem. In fact I think they got the reason exactly backwards.

The flaw in their argument is this, they believe that economic activity is driven from the top down but its not -it never is. All economic activity is driven from the bottom up; all economics is micro - macro only exists to explain aggregate behavior. So look this from the macro side is never going to expose the problem and the solution doesn't lie there either This problem was not caused at the 10,000 foot level by national economic policy gone awry, it was caused company by company by individuals who systematically (because the same people reshaped the systems to their own advantage) converted the productivity increases by labor into cash and then pure and then appropriated the gains to themselves. Labor and low level management earned it then "Capitalists," those institutional and very large investors who prospered so very much during these years stole it and it really doesn't make any difference what national monetary policy is or was because that isn't what stops theft.

[madokie]

11. That sounds about right too

and once the money is gone it's hard to get it back.